This has nothing to do with being "casual" or not taking the source "seriously". It has to with how people believe narratives operate. Not believing in "protectionism" is not an indication of not being serious about the source.

If a parent does not believe that their child needs to be protected from the influences of the Harry Potter books, that does not make them more casual about their children than someone who does.

Besides, if our primary goal is to ensure no one misinterprets the works and we do not mind if people dont engage with them where there is a risk of misinterpretation, wouldn't the logical thing to wish for be that all versions of Tolkien's works be rounded up and removed. We have no danger of misinterpretation then!